Costs to Soar Under ‘3 Strikes’ Plan, Study Says

California would have to build 20 additional prisons by the turn of the century and spend $2 billion a year to operate them if the proposed “three strikes and you’re out” initiative becomes law, the Department of Corrections reported Monday.

In the first detailed analysis on the impact of the proposed initiative that would imprison habitual felons for life, the department said California’s prison population, already the nation’s largest, would mushroom by 109,000 inmates by 2001.

The operating cost would increase each year for about 30 years, when the additional cost of running the new institutions would be $5.7 billion annually. At that time, as many as 275,000 additional prisoners could be serving long sentences under the initiative, the analysis said. Over that 30-year period, the state would spend $21 billion on prison construction.

Propelled by election year politics and public revulsion with crime, the “three-strikes” measure is regarded as a virtual certainty to become law this year. The estimates released Monday suggest that California will continue to face years of agonizing financial choices as the cost of prisons consumes an increasing portion of the state budget.

The Department of Corrections now consumes 7% of the state’s $40-billion general fund budget, which faces a multibillion-dollar deficit next year.

“If these additional costs have to be absorbed, I guess we’ll have to reduce other services,” said Steve Olsen, deputy director of Gov. Pete Wilson’s Department of Finance. “We’ll have to change our priorities.”

Olsen said higher education would be vulnerable if the initiative becomes law, as would state personnel in various departments. Funding for most of the rest of the budget, including primary education and welfare, is mandated by state and federal laws.

Assemblyman John Vasconcellos (D-Santa Clara), chairman of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, made an unusual appearance Monday before a Senate committee preparing to vote on a legislative version of the initiative. He said the measure would head the state toward bankruptcy.

“You’re committing the state for 30 years or forever until somebody has the courage to say, ‘We can’t afford that. There is no state of California left, except for the police and prison state,’ ” Vasconcellos told the senators.

Wilson continues to strongly support the “three-strikes” initiative, his aides said Monday.

“The governor has stated from the beginning that public safety is government’s No. 1 priority,” said Craig Brown, undersecretary for Youth and Adult Corrections. “He intends to see us carry that out, and therefore he will make funding these costs a priority.”

Brown said the funding mechanism is yet to be determined but expected most prison construction to be paid for by bonds, some of which would need voter approval.

Brown released the analysis at a briefing attended by Department of Finance officials, Department of Corrections Director James Gomez and four spokespersons for the governor.

The department’s nine-page analysis did little to slow lawmakers, who continued their rush to approve legislation by Assemblymen Bill Jones (R-Fresno) and Jim Costa (D-Fresno) that mimics the initiative.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved the Jones-Costa measure Monday, along with four other pieces of legislation that seek to imprison repeat felons for life.

“You have to respect the right of the people who are signing the initiative,” said Sen. Robert Presley (D-Riverside), chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

The “three-strikes” bill could go to the Senate floor Thursday. The Assembly overwhelmingly approved it last month. Mike Reynolds, proponent of the initiative, said he will drop his ballot proposition only if the Jones-Costa bill is signed into law by Monday.

The initiative and the Jones-Costa bill would impose mandatory sentences of life in prison for any third-time felon who has committed two prior violent or serious felonies. There are 29 crimes defined as violent or serious felonies. They range from murder and rape to residential burglary and furnishing hard drugs to minors.

The initiative and the Jones-Costa bill seek to double the sentences for second-time offenders, limit plea bargains and require that violent offenders serve 80% of their sentences. Most felons now serve only half their terms.

Brown said there are 277,000 Californians in and out of prison with one or more strikes. Of those, as many as 40,000 have two prior serious or violent felonies.

The state has 28 prisons that house 120,000 inmates. With or without the initiative, the state plans to build 12 prisons by the turn of the century to house an expected 170,000 prisoners.

If the initiative becomes law, the state will build those 12 prisons plus 20 more to accommodate additional prisoners who would be sentenced as a result of the “three-strikes” initiative, Brown said.

Ultimately, the analysis said, the state may have to build as many as 70 prisons by the time the initiative has its full impact 30 years from now. The analysis assumes that people sentenced to life in prison will serve three decades.

The Department of Corrections based its estimate on an analysis of felonies committed over the past 20 years, looked at the criminal histories of all felons sentenced in 1991, and extrapolated what their sentences would have been if the “three strikes” initiative had been law.

The Department of Corrections analysis does not include additional costs to counties and the state for defendants who are unlikely to accept plea bargains and who will demand trials if they are looking at mandatory sentences of life in prison.

But Placer County Superior Court Judge Richard Couzens, speaking on behalf of the state Judicial Council, predicted that there would be 17,000 additional jury trials a year, requiring 322 more judges at a cost of $276 million annually.

More costs will come from additional fees paid to jurors, court bailiffs and others. Couzens warned that the court system may not be able to meet the demands and that some lower-level felons may have their cases dismissed.

In its analysis, the Department of Corrections acknowledged that there are many unknowns.

“We do not view this estimate as destiny,” Brown said. “It is a trend analysis. It is not destiny. It doesn’t have to happen.”

Brown said that the analysis may underestimate the cost because it did not include offenses committed by juveniles. The initiative counts crimes committed by juveniles.

The analysis also did not calculate the added costs of medical treatment for what likely would be an aging prison population. The analysis said prison construction costs may be higher because felons sentenced to life behind bars generally are housed in high-security prisons, which cost more to build than lower-security facilities.

On the flip side, the analysis said, the state could save money because criminals might be deterred from committing crimes if they know they will be spending years behind bars.

“Undoubtedly there are some people who are going to be deterred,” Brown said. “It’s logical.”

Peter Greenwood, a criminal justice expert from RAND in Santa Monica, testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee that he sees little evidence that tougher laws have much deterrent effect.

Vasconcellos issued an analysis showing that the biggest cost of the initiative is due to the inclusion of residential burglary.

If burglars are excluded, the cost of the initiative would be cut by two-thirds, from more than $1 billion in 1999 if burglaries are counted, to $313 million that year if burglaries are not included.